Literature DB >> 21520861

Validation for 2D/3D registration. II: The comparison of intensity- and gradient-based merit functions using a new gold standard data set.

Christelle Gendrin1, Primoz Markelj, Supriyanto Ardjo Pawiro, Jakob Spoerk, Christoph Bloch, Christoph Weber, Michael Figl, Helmar Bergmann, Wolfgang Birkfellner, Bostjan Likar, Franjo Pernus.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: A new gold standard data set for validation of 2D/3D registration based on a porcine cadaver head with attached fiducial markers was presented in the first part of this article. The advantage of this new phantom is the large amount of soft tissue, which simulates realistic conditions for registration. This article tests the performance of intensity- and gradient-based algorithms for 2D/3D registration using the new phantom data set.
METHODS: Intensity-based methods with four merit functions, namely, cross correlation, rank correlation, correlation ratio, and mutual information (MI), and two gradient-based algorithms, the backprojection gradient-based (BGB) registration method and the reconstruction gradient-based (RGB) registration method, were compared. Four volumes consisting of CBCT with two fields of view, 64 slice multidetector CT, and magnetic resonance-T1 weighted images were registered to a pair of kV x-ray images and a pair of MV images. A standardized evaluation methodology was employed. Targets were evenly spread over the volumes and 250 starting positions of the 3D volumes with initial displacements of up to 25 mm from the gold standard position were calculated. After the registration, the displacement from the gold standard was retrieved and the root mean square (RMS), mean, and standard deviation mean target registration errors (mTREs) over 250 registrations were derived. Additionally, the following merit properties were computed: Accuracy, capture range, number of minima, risk of nonconvergence, and distinctiveness of optimum for better comparison of the robustness of each merit.
RESULTS: Among the merit functions used for the intensity-based method, MI reached the best accuracy with an RMS mTRE down to 1.30 mm. Furthermore, it was the only merit function that could accurately register the CT to the kV x rays with the presence of tissue deformation. As for the gradient-based methods, BGB and RGB methods achieved subvoxel accuracy (RMS mTRE down to 0.56 and 0.70 mm, respectively). Overall, gradient-based similarity measures were found to be substantially more accurate than intensity-based methods and could cope with soft tissue deformation and enabled also accurate registrations of the MR-T1 volume to the kV x-ray image.
CONCLUSIONS: In this article, the authors demonstrate the usefulness of a new phantom image data set for the evaluation of 2D/3D registration methods, which featured soft tissue deformation. The author's evaluation shows that gradient-based methods are more accurate than intensity-based methods, especially when soft tissue deformation is present. However, the current nonoptimized implementations make them prohibitively slow for practical applications. On the other hand, the speed of the intensity-based method renders these more suitable for clinical use, while the accuracy is still competitive.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2011        PMID: 21520861      PMCID: PMC3089767          DOI: 10.1118/1.3553403

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Med Phys        ISSN: 0094-2405            Impact factor:   4.071


  38 in total

Review 1.  The process and development of image-guided procedures.

Authors:  R L Galloway
Journal:  Annu Rev Biomed Eng       Date:  2001       Impact factor: 9.590

2.  Validation of a two- to three-dimensional registration algorithm for aligning preoperative CT images and intraoperative fluoroscopy images.

Authors:  G P Penney; P G Batchelor; D L Hill; D J Hawkes; J Weese
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2001-06       Impact factor: 4.071

3.  A robust method for registration of three-dimensional knee implant models to two-dimensional fluoroscopy images.

Authors:  Mohamed R Mahfouz; William A Hoff; Richard D Komistek; Douglas A Dennis
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2003-12       Impact factor: 10.048

Review 4.  A review of 3D/2D registration methods for image-guided interventions.

Authors:  P Markelj; D Tomaževič; B Likar; F Pernuš
Journal:  Med Image Anal       Date:  2010-04-13       Impact factor: 8.545

5.  Effects of x-ray and CT image enhancements on the robustness and accuracy of a rigid 3D/2D image registration.

Authors:  Jinkoo Kim; Fang-Fang Yin; Yang Zhao; Jae Ho Kim
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2005-04       Impact factor: 4.071

6.  A comparison of similarity measures for use in 2-D-3-D medical image registration.

Authors:  G P Penney; J Weese; J A Little; P Desmedt; D L Hill; D J Hawkes
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1998-08       Impact factor: 10.048

7.  Anatomy-based registration of CT-scan and intraoperative X-ray images for guiding a surgical robot.

Authors:  A Guéziec; P Kazanzides; B Williamson; R H Taylor
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 10.048

8.  Predicting error in rigid-body point-based registration.

Authors:  J M Fitzpatrick; J B West; C R Maurer
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1998-10       Impact factor: 10.048

9.  Multimodality image registration by maximization of mutual information.

Authors:  F Maes; A Collignon; D Vandermeulen; G Marchal; P Suetens
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  1997-04       Impact factor: 10.048

10.  A patient-to-computed-tomography image registration method based on digitally reconstructed radiographs.

Authors:  L Lemieux; R Jagoe; D R Fish; N D Kitchen; D G Thomas
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  1994-11       Impact factor: 4.071

View more
  7 in total

1.  Intraoperative image-based multiview 2D/3D registration for image-guided orthopaedic surgery: incorporation of fiducial-based C-arm tracking and GPU-acceleration.

Authors:  Yoshito Otake; Mehran Armand; Robert S Armiger; Michael D Kutzer; Ehsan Basafa; Peter Kazanzides; Russell H Taylor
Journal:  IEEE Trans Med Imaging       Date:  2011-11-18       Impact factor: 10.048

2.  High-performance GPU-based rendering for real-time, rigid 2D/3D-image registration and motion prediction in radiation oncology.

Authors:  Jakob Spoerk; Christelle Gendrin; Christoph Weber; Michael Figl; Supriyanto Ardjo Pawiro; Hugo Furtado; Daniella Fabri; Christoph Bloch; Helmar Bergmann; Eduard Gröller; Wolfgang Birkfellner
Journal:  Z Med Phys       Date:  2011-07-22       Impact factor: 4.820

3.  3D-2D image registration for target localization in spine surgery: investigation of similarity metrics providing robustness to content mismatch.

Authors:  T De Silva; A Uneri; M D Ketcha; S Reaungamornrat; G Kleinszig; S Vogt; N Aygun; S-F Lo; J-P Wolinsky; J H Siewerdsen
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2016-03-18       Impact factor: 3.609

4.  Automatic localization of vertebral levels in x-ray fluoroscopy using 3D-2D registration: a tool to reduce wrong-site surgery.

Authors:  Y Otake; S Schafer; J W Stayman; W Zbijewski; G Kleinszig; R Graumann; A J Khanna; J H Siewerdsen
Journal:  Phys Med Biol       Date:  2012-08-03       Impact factor: 3.609

5.  Clinical Assessment of 2D/3D Registration Accuracy in 4 Major Anatomic Sites Using On-Board 2D Kilovoltage Images for 6D Patient Setup.

Authors:  Guang Li; T Jonathan Yang; Hugo Furtado; Wolfgang Birkfellner; Åse Ballangrud; Simon N Powell; James Mechalakos
Journal:  Technol Cancer Res Treat       Date:  2014-09-15

6.  Monitoring tumor motion by real time 2D/3D registration during radiotherapy.

Authors:  Christelle Gendrin; Hugo Furtado; Christoph Weber; Christoph Bloch; Michael Figl; Supriyanto Ardjo Pawiro; Helmar Bergmann; Markus Stock; Gabor Fichtinger; Dietmar Georg; Wolfgang Birkfellner
Journal:  Radiother Oncol       Date:  2011-08-30       Impact factor: 6.280

7.  Application of Deep Convolution Network to Automated Image Segmentation of Chest CT for Patients With Tumor.

Authors:  Hui Xie; Jian-Fang Zhang; Qing Li
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2021-09-29       Impact factor: 6.244

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.